ESB Classic Forum's Pound for Pound Tournament 1st Round Part 3 of 3

Joe Louis beats Packey McFarland? You people must be crazy! Packey would outclass him, very easily.

 

I knew that you were not going to like this one, and it was a close call (as are most of these matchups, in all honesty). But why do you think Packey stands above Joe Louis, i cant really agree.

 

Louis only has a slim puncher's chance, lucky punch that he could depend on. McFarland was better than Billy Conn in every department, more skilful, more clever, faster, quicker, much better ring general, much better defense, much better offense, better and more effective footwork, with harder punch when he needed to (for their weight). Forget Joe Walcott, he wasn't in Packey's class where cleverness, feinting or footwork were concerned. Ezzard Charles, despite being an great, great boxer, doesn't compare to Packey either skillwise, especially in defense and footwork, also in speed.

 

Are you saying, because we have a lot of footage of Louis, he does better because of that? I'm afraid to even think what fourth-rate fighters people here would pick to beat Harry Greb based on him having no surviving fight film, only a film of ridiculous sparring session.
The fact is Louis had done badly against good boxers, it's on film. How anyone in their sane mind could pick him to beat McFarland, I don't know.

Contemporary writers often said that Packey knew every point of the fighting game to a perfection. Tens of different writers wrote this compliment in their fight reports. How many other fighters in history do you know who had this said about them? The only thing he was criticized for was supposedly lacking the punch.

 

From my impressions, it's mostly in and out and around movements, using a lot of angles. Not the jumpy moves of Dundee or Greb, but more shuffling moves, with feet staying on the ground, a-la 168lb Jones Jr, although not as quick as Roy, but more mobile and active than him.

 

So, Senya, are you using some type of mythical pound for pound stylistical assessment to come to your conclusion. Ie assuming both were heavyweights.

His record is fantastic, and underated of course, particularly the Gibbons win, which may arguably be the best pound for pound win ever. But Joe Louis' record is in its own class.

And even under your own criteria where you say Joe only had a punchers chance, it is still a punchers chance that served him time and time again. A punchers chance is misleading if there is a 50% or better chance that he lands those punches!

 

MacFarland was schooled by a past it Dusty Miller smack bang in the middle of his prime. could you envision Louis being dominated and run out of chicago by a Dusty Miller level fighter? Nah blud

 

Joe Louis beats Packey McFarland
Barney Ross beats Archie Moore
Ray Robinson beats Carlos Monzon
Pernell Whitaker beats Thomas Hearns

 

Did everyone, who voted for Louis, anticipate that he wins by lucky punch (the only way he could win)? If so, he wins the tournament by default, since you'll apply the same rule to every matchup he participates in. Even if the chance is one in a million, he'll land it.